I really thought I would be the last one to like this game but despite some of it's minor consolness I've had a a lot of fun. Great visuals for the most part, much better texture detail than I though we would see...not the best but better. I'm just about done, on hells highway now.

I really thought I would be the last one to like this game but despite some of it's minor consolness I've had a a lot of fun. Great visuals for the most part, much better texture detail than I though we would see...not the best but better. I'm just about done, on hells highway now.

why does that church look so blurry. please don't use Imagevenue, that site is just horrible. after i closed down the screenshot bunch of x rated stuff poped up.

__________________
Windows 8 the next big failure, right after Windows ME

I know, but between my Q6600 @ 3.8 Ghz and the E8500 @ 4.5, the E8500 is smoother even in games like GOW (and warhead, although only used 2) that used 4 cores. At some point frequency crushes quantity. Even though utilization is high its not maxed @ 100% the entire time. Having 2 cores runnin 97% @ 4.5Ghz is still better than 50% on 4 cores @ 3.8Ghz. I know I've benchmarked it

My E8500 beats my Q6600 in encoding too. I had a E8400 @ 4.2Ghz and at 4.2ghz the q6600 @ 3.8 was all around the same performance. Another 300 Mhz made a difference and the E8500 has bumped my quad for good right now.

unless what ever program you were using was not optimized for Quad core.

Its possible and it happens. Using ConvertX to DVD which is quad core compatible, the E8500 is as fast, slightly faster. Just because an application is multi core compatible doesn't mean its going to load all 4 cores to 100%. Its load balancing across them. with enough frequency on 2 cores it can beat 4 cores. Also, the Wolfdales have 6MB cache per core Q6600 have 2MB per core - so the cache may play a part as well.